Re: gEDA-user: GPLv3 question

[DJ Delorie <dj@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

<IANAL>

> I'm looking at using libopenstm32 for ARM chips, and wonder what
> GPLv3 does about your ability to sell a system with code in it.

Nothing.  The GPL does not concern itself with money, just freedom.
Sell if for as much as you like, as long as you license it in a
GPLv3-compatible way.

> Can you sell it without a complete tool chain?  In other words is my
> compiler cross compile output a covered work when I use a GPLv3
> library like libopenstm32?

The compiler is not part of the "work" unless you use a custom
compiler.  If you link a library with your core code, that becomes a
"work".  If you have a custom build script that builds your code,
that's part of your "work".  If the compiler links its own standard
libraries, that's part of your "work" but the GPL has an exception for
it - if you haven't modified them, at least (if you modify them,
you're not using the library that's "normally provided").

> I'm thinking this library makes any code you make with it GPLv3.

No, it makes any binary you build with it limited to being
redistributed under GPLv3-compatible terms.  It does not change the
copyright status of anything else you link in with it, and you are
certainly allowed to grant more freedoms than the GPLv3 requires.
There are non-GPLv3 licenses that are GPLv3-compatible.

> And if you don't use a GPL library, just the GPL compiler, your
> output can be sold, distributed without any source code.

Only because GCC's runtime libraries are specifically licensed to
allow that.  Of course, if you don't use those either, it doesn't
matter any way.  But the "mere act of compiling" doesn't cause the
compiler's license to affect your code's license.

</IANAL>


_______________________________________________
geda-user mailing list
geda-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user